On Karma

[Syne]

How is neglecting something not free will? Ever hear the saying "choosing to not make a choice is still a choice?" Do you think people are forced to be negligent? If so, why would negligence be a crime?

The child was free to enter the garage, but not old enough to be responsible for the choice. That is why the adults failed him. They should have secured to door better, explained the danger, and/or raised him to not go snooping around someone else's house.

[Magical Realist]

Ever hear the saying "choosing to not make a choice is still a choice?" Do you think people are forced to be negligent? If so, why would negligence be a crime?

Uh no..Not making a choice is not a choice. It's not making a choice. And negligence is a mistake, not a choice. It is unintentional and not deliberate.

The child was free to enter the garage, but not old enough to be responsible for the choice.

So a child doesn't have free choice? How sad..

[Syne]

Ever hear the saying "choosing to not make a choice is still a choice?" Do you think people are forced to be negligent? If so, why would negligence be a crime?

Uh no..Not making a choice is not a choice. It's not making a choice. And negligence is a mistake, not a choice. It is unintentional and not deliberate.

Oh, really? It's hard to believe a person your age doesn't understand something so simple.
No doubt, you may feel like you don't choose, but if given the option to choose something or not, if you didn't opt to "not," who did? Some homunculus that lives in your head? Was it fate that made you apathetic and idle?

Seems to explain a lot.

The child was free to enter the garage, but not old enough to be responsible for the choice.

So a child doesn't have free choice? How sad..

Try to read that again. Where do you imagine "free to enter" implied "no free choice?"

[Magical Realist]

So the child had freewill, but it was overridden by the dog owner's freewill to negligently allow access to her vicious dogs? Sounds like convoluted bullshit to me.

[Syne]

So the child had freewill, but it was overridden by the dog owner's freewill to negligently allow access to her vicious dogs? Sounds like convoluted bullshit to me.

Really? An adult being more responsible for their choices than children sounds convoluted?
Well, if you've spent any time justifying gay sex with young boys or minors opting to irreversibly change their sex, I guess you'd have to feel something negative about the idea that adults should be more responsible and children cannot consent.

[confused2]

Seems like God doesn't go into trailer parks and doesn't love trailer trash kids whereas children from good homes get the full benefit of his love. Someone more cynical than myself might suggest .. you either see it or you don't.

[Syne]

As usual, MR can't defend his bullshit.

[confused2]

I am absolutely sure MR would honour the moral 'duty of care' without regard to any freedoms granted in the great American Constitution. What I find worrying is that keeping dangerous dogs is a 'Constitutional freedom' so Syne can't say a word against it regardless of of any moral duty (which he doesn't acknowledge) of care for anything .. in the UK just cruelty to the dogs would be enough for the dogs to have been taken away from her and they would probably have been killed before they killed a child instead of after.

[Syne]

I am absolutely sure MR would honour the moral 'duty of care' without regard to any freedoms granted in the great American Constitution. What I find worrying is that keeping dangerous dogs is a 'Constitutional freedom' so Syne can't say a word against it regardless of of any moral duty (which he doesn't acknowledge) of care for anything .. in the UK just cruelty to the dogs would be enough for the dogs to have been taken away from her and they would probably have been killed before they killed a child instead of after.

With any freedom comes responsibility, which is why I said the dog owner was criminally negligent...under US law. But your nanny state would never allow you to take such responsibility in the first place, because your political betters do not see you as adults.

And where is there any hint of cruelty to animals here? Most US garages are quite nice. I don't know about the UK. Of course cruelty to animals and neglect of their care are criminal in the US. How ignorant can you be?

[confused2]

Dogs unlicensed, unvaccinated, small unfenced property - you might wonder how often the dogs left the garage (however nice it might be in there).